TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Upholds Rejection of Accused's Affidavit Evidence in Cheque Bouncing Cases Under Negotiable Instruments Act.</h1> <h3>Prabhudas Panjainmal Rice and Dal Mill and Ors. Versus Avon Trade Link Shakti Nagar and Ors.</h3> The court dismissed the petitions filed under s. 482 Cr.P.C., affirming the trial court's decision to reject the accused's examination-in-chief submitted ... Dishonour of Cheque - rejection of examination-in-chief of accused submitted by way of affidavit under Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, at the stage of defence evidence - HELD THAT:- In the case of RAJNI DHINGRA VERSUS SANJEEV CHUGH [2019 (11) TMI 1830 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT], the issue involved in the matter has been dealt with and after taking note of INDIAN BANK ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2014 (5) TMI 750 - SUPREME COURT] and also MANDVI CO-OP. BANK LTD. VERSUS NIMESH B. THAKORE [2010 (1) TMI 570 - SUPREME COURT] held that the petitioner being an accused, who is facing trial in complaint under the provisions of Negotiable Instrument Act, is not competent to tender his evidence through affidavit and learned trial Court has not committed any error while declining permission to this effect to the petitioner. The Apex court in case of Indian Bank Association was dealing with the issue of laying down appropriate guidelines/directions to be followed by the Courts while trying complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the issue before the Apex Court was to ensure expeditious disposal of such cases. Though, reference to observations of the Apex court in case of Mandvi Cooperative Bank Ltd. was made but as already discussed the law settled by the Apex Court in that cases is clear and has not been set-aside or dissented so far. Even that was not in issue before the Apex Court in case of Indian Bank Association. The petitioners being accused who are facing trial in complaint under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, are not competent to tender their evidence through affidavit and learned trial court has not committed any error while declining permission to this effect to the petitioners being accused. Petition dismissed. Issues involved:The judgment involves the issue of setting aside an order passed by the trial court in Cheque bouncing cases u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, concerning the rejection of examination-in-chief of the accused submitted by way of affidavit u/s 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act at the stage of defense evidence.Details of the Judgment:Issue 1: Rejection of examination-in-chief of accused submitted by way of affidavitThe petitioners filed petitions u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to set aside the trial court's order rejecting their examination-in-chief in Cheque bouncing cases. The trial court rejected the applications and affidavits filed by the accused, leading to the petitions. The petitioners argued that the trial court erred in relying on previous judgments and failed to consider subsequent directions by the Apex Court. They sought to have the affidavits taken as evidence in the interest of justice.Issue 2: Competence to tender evidence through affidavitThe respondents contended that the trial court rightly rejected the applications based on previous judgments. They cited cases from Punjab and Haryana High Court and a Full Bench Decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court to support their argument. The court found merit in the respondents' contentions, emphasizing that the accused in a complaint under the Negotiable Instrument Act are not competent to tender evidence through affidavit.Conclusion:After considering the arguments from both parties and analyzing the relevant case law, the court dismissed both petitions as devoid of merit. It was established that the accused in cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot tender evidence through affidavit, and the trial court did not err in declining permission for the same. The judgment highlighted the settled law in this regard and upheld the trial court's decision to reject the examination-in-chief submitted by way of affidavit.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
